Suppr超能文献

比较真实与模拟自杀遗书:一个新视角。

Comparing genuine and simulated suicide notes: a new perspective.

作者信息

Black S T

机构信息

Department of Psychology, University of California, Santa Cruz.

出版信息

J Consult Clin Psychol. 1993 Aug;61(4):699-702. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.61.4.699.

Abstract

E. S. Shneidman and N. L. Farberow (1957) preselected writers of stimulated suicide notes to eliminate vulnerable subjects. Subsequent comparisons of genuine and stimulated notes have perpetuated the methodological misstep of the original study. In this study, a new set of genuine notes were selected from completed suicides by men and women who left at least one note, who were White, and who were older than 18 years of age. The simulated note writers (SNWs) were unpreselected, unpaid community volunteers. Genuine note writers in the current and 1957 samples were not found to differ; SNWs from the samples did differ. Problems with the interpretation of differences between genuine and simulated notes are discussed, with a focus on the role-playing nature of the simulated notes.

摘要

E. S. 施奈德曼和N. L. 法伯罗(1957年)预先挑选了撰写模拟自杀遗书的作者,以排除易受影响的受试者。随后对真实遗书和模拟遗书的比较延续了原始研究中的方法错误。在本研究中,从已完成自杀的男性和女性留下的至少一份遗书中挑选了一组新的真实遗书,这些人是白人,年龄超过18岁。模拟遗书撰写者(SNW)是未经挑选、无报酬的社区志愿者。当前样本和1957年样本中的真实遗书撰写者没有发现差异;样本中的模拟遗书撰写者存在差异。本文讨论了真实遗书和模拟遗书之间差异解释的问题,重点关注模拟遗书的角色扮演性质。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验